From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Scott Wood Subject: Re: [PATCHv3] mtd: gpio-nand: add device tree bindings Date: Mon, 1 Aug 2011 15:39:50 -0500 Message-ID: <20110801153950.634eb432@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> References: <1312207374-14760-1-git-send-email-jamie@jamieiles.com> <20110801133825.0b4fff24@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> <20110801193316.GA2648@pulham.picochip.com> <20110801151209.7b904320@schlenkerla.am.freescale.net> <20110801202536.GB2648@pulham.picochip.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: In-Reply-To: <20110801202536.GB2648-apL1N+EY0C9YtYNIL7UdTEEOCMrvLtNR@public.gmane.org> List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org Sender: devicetree-discuss-bounces+gldd-devicetree-discuss=m.gmane.org-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org To: Jamie Iles Cc: David Woodhouse , devicetree-discuss-uLR06cmDAlY/bJ5BZ2RsiQ@public.gmane.org, linux-mtd-IAPFreCvJWM7uuMidbF8XUB+6BGkLq7r@public.gmane.org, Artem Bityutskiy List-Id: devicetree@vger.kernel.org On Mon, 1 Aug 2011 21:25:36 +0100 Jamie Iles wrote: > On Mon, Aug 01, 2011 at 03:12:09PM -0500, Scott Wood wrote: > > It looks like the code uses a little-endian accessor (readw) in a couple > > places. The instance in gpio_nand_readbuf16() should never be reached > > since the NAND layer should never do an unaligned buffer read, but the one > > in gpio_nand_verifybuf16() could cause problems. [snip] > > OK, so for this should I just document that all accesses are > little-endian? We can then add properties later if we need something > different. Right now, the driver is using a mix of native and little endian accesses. That's not something the binding can fix. :-) Native endian is what it should be. > > Or perhaps the io sync address should just be a physical address, not a reg > > that gets translated. > > OK, I like the sound of that. I'm a bit new to the world of device tree > so I'm not sure of the best way to do this. Would reading the > #address-cells property then use of_read_number() be the right way? I'd just unconditionally define it as a 64-bit physical address. -Scott